Point of View”

Continuing the theme of defense of militant tactics, Davison lays out the forty-year history of

the movement with renewed energy.

Sir,–In the East Anglian Daily Times of October 20th there are some paragraphs on the

considerable part which women have played in the recent elections in Sweden, in which

they have thrown out the Conservatives and helped to put in their allies, the Liberals and

Social Democrats. After a description of their really marvelous activities in the campaign,

the paragraph winds up with the words, ‘Their campaign was not marked by any outbreaks

of violence against their opponents or the Government. The Swedish Suffragettes seem

to have campaigned on the lines of peaceful persuasion from the first. And, perhaps,

comments the “Westminster Gazette,” that is why the mere man in Sweden seems to have

listened to them.’

Will you allow me to point out three facts as criticism on this passage? First of all

the methods of the Swedish Suffragettes (sic!), as you term them, are precisely those of

English women without exception, until six years ago. Thus the oldest Suffrage Society of

all, the London National Society for Woman Suffrage, formed in 1867, followed by the

National Union for Woman’s Suffrage Societies, worked on entirely peaceful and

constitutional lines with an election policy of supporting a candidate ‘who declares himself

the best friend to the cause of women.’

When women formed themselves into societies for party work they took up a line

similar to that of the Swedish women. Thus the first Liberal Association was formed in

1881, ‘For the furtherance of Liberal thought and Liberal policy, which includes just

legislation for women, and the protection of the interest of children.’ In 1885 the Primrose

League instituted the Ladies’ Grand Council, to maintain the three clearly defined political

principles for which the Conservative Party claimed to stand, namely, Religion, the

Constitution, and the Empire. In 1887 the Women’s Liberal Federation was inaugurated ‘to

promote the adoption of Liberal principles in the Government of the country and just

legislation for women and children.’

These various women’s organizations have done long, loyal, and yeomen [sic] service for

the men’s parties, without any return, in spite of the great fact that the two Liberal

women’s societies stand for woman suffrage. May I add that Swedish Suffragettes (!) also

seem no nearer to that goal.

Secondly, no person heard of woman suffrage till six years ago, except the few

advanced thinkers who looked upon it as an impossible scheme in practical politics. The

change of public attitude may be seen to have grown in vigour from six years ago with the

rise of a new school. The success of that school is its justification.

Thirdly, the ‘mere man’ in Sweden, like his prototype in England, is quite ready to

listen to the women so long as they are merely doing his work for him. No doubt, like his

English confrere, it is a far cry to the time when he will begin to consider politics from the

woman’s point of view, and to see that things are not as they should be so long as the

woman’s point of view is unexpressed in the State. I am, etc.,

EMILY WILDING DAVISON

31, Coram Street, W.C.,

31st October, 1911